I'm sure there are many important databases with 100 byte rows. But very few of these will be SQL databases, and very few of these will be using InnoDB.

1) re: InnoDB - sorry, but your constant comparison to InnoDB only reminds me of the old joke about the snail that got run over by a turtle - while waking up in the recovery room, the snail says "I don't remember what happened, it all happened so fast!" Beating InnoDB at anything says nothing useful. http://symas.com/mdb/memcache/

We tested compression. http://symas.com/mdb/inmem/compress/

2) We tested with multiple malloc libraries as well. http://symas.com/mdb/inmem/malloc/ If your storage engine needs a particular memory allocator, You're Doing It Wrong.

3) I didn't write the TokuDB code, Leif Walsh did. https://gist.github.com/leifwalsh/8378154#file-db_bench_ydb-...

https://github.com/hyc/leveldb/commits/benches/doc/bench/db_...

I also didn't write the LSM-based programs, their respective authors did. I trusted each of them to use their own APIs correctly. That may have been a mistake in the case of the TokuDB code, but given the lack of documentation I didn't have much better alternatives.

4) We have much longer benchmark runs published as well. But as noted here http://symas.com/mdb/hyperdex/ what really matters is the total number of ops executed. "Running for a long time" is only a requirement when your DB engine is ... slow.